↓ Skip to main content

Laparoscopic drilling by diathermy or laser for ovulation induction in anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
107 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Laparoscopic drilling by diathermy or laser for ovulation induction in anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001122.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cindy Farquhar, Julie Brown, Jane Marjoribanks

Abstract

Surgical ovarian wedge resection was the first established treatment for women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) but was largely abandoned both due to the risk of postsurgical adhesions and the introduction of medical ovulation induction. However, women with PCOS who are treated with medical ovulation induction, with drugs such as gonadotrophins, often have an over-production of follicles which may result in ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and multiple pregnancies. Moreover, gonadotrophins, though effective, are costly and time-consuming and their use requires intensive monitoring. Surgical therapy with laparoscopic ovarian 'drilling' (LOD) may avoid or reduce the need for medical ovulation induction, or may facilitate its usefulness. The procedure can be done on an outpatient basis with less trauma and fewer postoperative adhesions than with traditional surgical approaches. Many uncontrolled observational studies have claimed that ovarian drilling is followed, at least temporarily, by a high rate of spontaneous ovulation and conception, or that subsequent medical ovulation induction becomes easier.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Ukraine 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 103 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 18%
Unspecified 14 13%
Student > Postgraduate 12 11%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Other 38 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 47%
Unspecified 15 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Other 18 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,125,511
of 12,330,736 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,057
of 8,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,037
of 116,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#43
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,330,736 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 116,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.